New Age Parity

**  
**

by Pete Bodo

The WTA these days is giving us a terrific snapshot of what tennis looks like when the game is in a state of parity, rather than in the throes of a clear hierarchy, or pecking order.I think of this as the WTA's  new-age parity, because it sometimes looks like the women of the WTA have crossed a Rubicon, choosing (unconsciously)  to share the wealth and accolades rather than fight over them.

Ordinary parity exists when there's a simple gridlock of ambition and talent and no player, no matter how hard she tries, has the game or the will to dominate.Our new-age parity exits because nobody wants to dominate badly enough. As a result, hard working players overachieve and emerge as champions or legitimate contenders at major events. Let's remember that two of the most recent no. 1 ranked players scaled those heights without having won a Grand Slam event.

The new-age parity isn't merely the product of an across-the-board diminished level of talent, dedication or even of increased indifference to traditional sops like a high ranking or a Grand Slam title. It was created by a tsunami of factors, some of them unfortunate or unexpected: injury (Maria Sharapova), premature retirement (Justine Henin and Kim Clijsters), flawed competitive character (Elena Dementieva and Svetlana Kuznetsova), and a ranking system that is first and foremost a consistency rating (Dinara Safina).

You'd have to be perverse to deny that Safina is the no.1 player in the world, when the WTA built an entire digital structure for identifying and rewarding the most consistently excellent competitor in the field. But you'd also have to be willfully ignorant to claim that Safina is the best player in the world when you have multiple-Grand Slam winners (the Williams sisters) and an Olympic games gold medalist (Dementieva) ranked below her - in some cases, well below her. Let's just say that the best player isn't always the no. 1 player and leave it at that - which is probably what Serena should have done early this week when, before she played her first match at the Italian Open, she proclaimed: “Quite frankly, I’m the best in the world.”

Serena then went out in Rome and lost her second consecutive first-round clay-court match to Patty Schnyder, a complicated young lady who's measure of courage has never equaled her measure of skill. I wrote  a post on this subject for ESPN last night, and spent part of this morning pondering Serena's attitude. She's venturing a little too close to the delusional, and I'm inclined to think that the more she finds herself struggling, the more volubly she'll declare her superiority - that means that by the time Wimbledon rolls around, she'll be shouting it from the rooftops of London. And if she goes on to win Wimbledon (which can't be discounted, this being Serena we're talking about), she'll again have the last laugh.

But it seems more likely that Serena has painted herself into a corner. Discussions about her "fitness" and weight have been perilous and largely unfruitful, often ending up with bitter accusations of stereotyping - or worse. Besides, who are we to question whether or not Serena is fit, if she herself claims that she's been working hard?

Okay, so let's say she's fit, and that all that flesh she's carrying around is a gift of nature. How then do you analyze and rationalize losses like her two most recent? Is Klara Zakopalova (who beat Serena in Marbella) so formidable that the match turned on little things - lack of adequate time on clay, a poor winner-to-error ratio?

Keep in mind that in 2008, Serena welcomed the clay-court season by winning Charleston (yeah, I know, it's green clay, blah, blah, blah. . .). She then lost a heartbreaker to Safina in Berlin, 7-6 in the third. Serena won a couple of matches in Rome and was ushered out of the third round at Roland Garros by Katarina Srebotnik.  It wasn't a great run on clay, but it wasn't awful, either. This year may be different.

Just as alarming, Serena got exactly one game in each of the third sets she's played in her two-clay matches of 2009 (Marbella and Rome). Given Serena's zest for combat, those blowout sets tell me something. Something broke down and stopped working, either mentally or physically. Given Serena's confident nature and zeal, those breadsticks suggest that her main problem may be physical. And in tennis, the lines of communication between the physical and mental are always open. Me or you telling Serena that she's out of shape, vulnerable, and not to be trusted to win the match is nothing compared to Serena's own body telling her that.**

This is where it gets tricky, though. Serena's body has been changing, seemingly right before our eyes. I don't know if all that extra flesh we've been seeing represents the fulfillment of some blind genetic mandate, or something as banal as a few too many late night trips to the drive-through window, or the convenience store. I just know that the extra flesh is there, and that it's impossible to think about her performance without wondering about the role her relative fitness plays in it. Those of you who play the game know that heavy people are sometimes surprisingly good, in singles as well as doubles, and the pro tour - especially on the WTA side - has always had its share of hefty lasses. But none of them were top-tier players, except in doubles.

It's also an open secret that women tennis players, far more than their male counterparts, are in peril of   really ballooning out shortly after they retire. I'm not going to embarrass anyone by naming names, but obesity is definitely a threat that any woman leaving the pro tour must take seriously. And while Serena is just 27, she's in her 11th full year on the  tour. She's playing a modest schedule (13 events in 2008; Jankovic played 22) that allows her plenty of down time to work on her game and fitness - or not.

While Serena still intimidates her WTA peers, that can change quickly. Dominant players like Serena are oppressors, and they stand a greater chance of being overthrown than of retiring peacefully. That's an occupational hazard for a top player, which is why most of them rarely crow about their triumphs or declare their superiority. They know their days are numbered, it's just a matter of knowing when that number comes up, and not shortchanging themselves.

Dinara Safina has been taking a lot of flack lately, and not just from the Williamses, whose attitude toward the reigning no. 1 is probably best described as condescending. But Safina keeps winning tennis matches, and that builds confidence just as losing matches destroys it. As I type these words, Safina has just dispatched Venus Williams, 6-4 in the third, to make the Rome final opposite Svetlana Kuznetsova.

Spring is here. Heads will roll.